This now-deleted tweet is from an epidemiologist with a large following (including policymakers and journalists), a blue verification-checkmark on Twitter, and a profile including the title of "Dr" accompanied by a photo in a lab coat.
🧵1/13
Looking further, I cannot find a historical record of a personal website nor Twitter account prior to 2020. The title of Doctor is derived from a PhD that does not appear to be specified online.
2/13
In the footer of this person's website:
"The author is an epidemiologist, not a physician, and the contents of this website should not be used to prevent, diagnose, or treat any disease. Always consult your personal physician for medical advice."
3/13
This person often champions extraordinary governmental health powers, regardless of whether those interventions violate the basic principles of medical ethics (or the freedoms that are guaranteed under a constitutional, representative government).
4/13
I am not questioning this person's credentials nor denying anyone's right to expression. However, I wish to discuss influence/reach.
Tweets from this epidemiologist have received, by reasonable estimation, *hundreds of millions* of impressions, across a worldwide audience.
5/13
In Sept. 2020, this person shared questionable data.
A concerned parent responded with his fears.
Dr. Alasdair Munro, a pediatric emergency medicine clinician and infectious diseases researcher (also a member of The Lancet COVID-19 Commission), sought to ease that fear.
6/13
Dr. Munro's response to the scared father was called "supremely unhelpful" by Apoorva Mandavilli, a science writer at The New York Times (who, notably, overstated U.S. pediatric COVID-19 hospitalizations by more than 1,000%, requiring a massive correction in Fall 2021).
7/13
Dr. Munro, who has the most expertise regarding the topic at hand, has a smaller Twitter following than the epidemiologist and the journalist, he does not include professional designations beside his name, and he does not appear in a lab coat in his profile photo.
8/13
Meanwhile, I continue to find influential persons, cited by journalists and policymakers as experts, who use titles like epidemiologist, biostatistician, or public health scientist (as well as "Dr.," in place of disclosing or specifying a specific PhD, e.g. Literature).
9/13
It is possible to earn a Master of Public Health degree and the title "Public Health Scientist" from a recognizable New England School of Public Health after months (not years), of remote-learning.
No background in science or medicine is necessary.
10/13
In my opinion, many professional depictions grossly misrepresent work experience and educational history as it relates to the COVID-19 pandemic (especially in the field of pediatric health), and subsequently, lack necessary disclosures.
11/13
Additionally, I continue to fear that public policy as well as public opinion is being shaped by attention-seeking hyperbole uttered by those who have tenuous connections to science and medicine (and often, a total disregard for nuance, ethics and holistic health).
12/13
In my opinion, it is journalists who have the best platform and incentive to set the record straight.
The claim that "there was no pandemic" is not as crazy as it might sound, at least as I see things now. Extraordinary things were written in Dec. 2020, and when taken together, these passages offer a very different view of why things went so wrong.
A short 🧵 that I hope will 👀
"This discovery adds to evidence that the virus was quietly spreading around the world before health officials and the public were aware...the virus's presence in U.S. communities likely didn't start with the first case identified case in January."
- NPR, Dec. 1, 2020
"We were intubating sick patients very early. Not for the patients’ benefit, but to control the epidemic." Doctors say a return to pre-pandemic ventilator practice is saving lives.
This clip is from the Disney Junior show, "Rise Up, Sing Out."
In my view, what is being depicted in this exchange is closer to psychological abuse than to social emotional learning. Consider the following points:
1/14
The show begins with one boy making an observation about skin color. Before the second boy has a chance to fully process his feelings, let alone respond, a third-party shouts "Hold it!"
"Did that comment make you feel uncomfortable?"
2/14
(Meddling aside, the presumption of another's feelings is not necessarily through an empathetic lens: projection works similarly.)
Look at how the timing of the media's hard push into non-stop victim/oppressor narratives corresponds with youth mental health and educational outcomes.
Skyrocketing depression. Falling test scores.
It's not just social media at play. Legacy media is functioning like an abuser.
The use of socio-manipulative behavior is a way to highjack and weaponize empathy, then direct it against oneself and others.
A person, sufficiently abused, may become a recruiter for, and a veritable extension of, an abuser.
To be sick with Covid-19 in early 2020, yet blissfully unaware of how severe it was...was to have a significantly higher chance of survival. See:
Diamond Princess (zero deaths under age 60)
vs.
Hyper-Vigilance in Cities and Hospitals
vs.
Extreme Negligence in Care Facilities
Looking at the total population of the Diamond Princess, the number of deaths attributed to Covid-19, the age of the deceased, and the date recorded...then, creating a pro-rata, say, the size of a large wedding, would the excess mortality have been noticeable, let alone shocking?
To be clear, I believe that Covid-19 had the fundamental ability to drive excess death on a population level (maybe Sweden in 2020 is the purest example of that). My point is how radically different early-2020 outcomes were based on access to information/care/etc. More ≠ better.
Howdy, @ev_rat. On the subject of GAN renderings, there is an aspect of the story that is likely embarrassing to journalists, and thus, I haven't seen much written on the subject.
Some quoted "experts" are not who they purport to be.
1/7
In 2020, I found several mastheads/about-us pages that were rendered. E.g. These non-existent "people" were quoted in NY Magazine, Woman's Day, Business, Inverse, Reader's Digest, Lifehacker, The Simple Dollar, Score, Fatherly, Legal Zoom, Business News Daily and Cheapism.
2/7
I was particularly troubled to find so-called experts quoted with respect to parenting, mental health and Covid-19 related topics.
Of course, *someone* was actually the source of the quotes...but whom?
At the time, the practice seemed to be a tool of affiliate marketers.
3/7